Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm >> The War Room >> RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/4/2014 1:31:46 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
0641 hrs - US orders:

1st Plt has traded fire with the FSE and is down to a single squad and Mk 19 GL. 2d Plt has been destroyed. 3d Plt took fire from the FSE got reduced to its MK 19 and Dragon teams, and fled to the A Company command post.

The FSE has a single tank operational. 2d MRC is down to just a single inf squad. 4th Tank Co has 4 T80s.

A Bty will keep hitting the largest concentration of Soviet combat power visible. Batteries of the RAG continue resupply. MRB mortars are firing on 3d Plt's now vacated defensive position.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 31
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/4/2014 1:47:37 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
0741 hrs - US orders:

The Soviets have seized the objective. A Co has the HQ M2, 1xInf sqd, and 1xDragon remaining. The MRB HQ and Mortars are moving forward and the remaining 4 T80s of the 4th Tank Co will soon press on to the MRB's subsequent objective.

The RAG is resupplied and fires upon the remnants of A Co.

At this point, I am stopping the fight. The Soviets have 37% of forces and Decisive Victory of 69%. US forces are at 44%.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Iron Mike Golf -- 8/4/2014 3:04:28 PM >


_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 32
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/4/2014 2:16:33 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
Commentary and Lessons:

I don't think I violated and principles of Soviet doctrine from this period. I'd be grateful for comments in this regard, especially if I was amiss somewhere. This scenario is loosely based on an experience of mine at CMTC (scaled up to the AGMB). In that one, we were fighting the FSE and a remnant of the CRP (a sole BMP) popped up behind one of the platoons out of a gully and wreaked havoc.

Some lessons:
1. Artillery preps matter. Very much. Even when they do not inflict casualties, the reduction in Readiness greatly enhances the survivability of the attacking force. And the drop in Morale makes it easier to push defenders off their chosen ground. That is a plus, since defenders will be on the best ground available to them. A fresh mech company will tear up an MRB attack. A rattled one, as we have seen, not so much.

2. Recon elements are not simply VPs awaiting collection by the enemy. The Sct teams screening A Co did yeomen service, though they should have been screening further forward. That would give earlier warning.

3. When playing against a human opponent, you need not always engage a unit to fix it. The knowledge that a unit is "out there" can definitely have an effect.

4. I should have started the survivability move by the US plts earlier. The plt in Lengenbostel could have kept eyes on the CRP/FSE assault route and the Sct tm to the east would warn of the main body attack.

Comment and speculation is heartily invited!



_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 33
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/5/2014 10:37:41 AM   
Panzer_Leader


Posts: 26
Joined: 1/10/2014
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Status: offline
Excellent AAR and exposition of the doctrine and tactics used by a Soviet MRB acting as an AGMB Iron Mike Golf. My understanding is only based on the publicly available US Field Manuals, DIA publications, ARMOR articles and writings by Glantz and Isby but your application here looks spot on to me. I think it also demonstrates that, when applied correctly with realistic force ratios, Soviet doctrine and tactics builds the pressure on NATO in a linear fashion (CRP, FSE, AGMB, Regt etc.) and can be lethal. Of course, a section of M901 ITV or cross-attached platoon of tanks could have tipped the balance back in favour of NATO - or not. Great stuff!

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 34
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/5/2014 12:34:33 PM   
Mad Russian


Posts: 12717
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline
It's always about the balance of power and the individuals wielding it.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to Panzer_Leader)
Post #: 35
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/5/2014 1:29:05 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
Thanks P_L. My personal experience in the US Army's modernization from M113 to M2 was that D Co traded M910s for M2 and ther personnel were reclassified from 11H (Heavy Antiarmor Infantryman) to 11M (Mechanized Infantryman). I do believe a plt of tanks would make quite a difference. 1500 m is not quite enough depth for a pure mech company.

I very much agree with MR. The closer to parity of forces, the more the outcome hinges on the skill of the leaders.

_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to Mad Russian)
Post #: 36
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/9/2014 10:55:57 AM   
Panzer_Leader


Posts: 26
Joined: 1/10/2014
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Status: offline
A slightly off-topic question Iron Mike Golf. The victory markers you use, i.e. the NATO star, are not the originals shipped with the game so I presume they're mods. I've had a look for them on this forum but can't find them. Where did you get them from?

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 37
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/9/2014 2:22:38 PM   
Capn Darwin


Posts: 4831
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline
Panzer Leader, they are packaged in the custom folder of 2.04. Plodder did them and gave us the ok to ship out with 2.04. You should see them in any game you play with 2.04 unless they are missing from the Map Markers\Custom folder.

_____________________________

2.08 Update is out. We are ramping up on 2.1 now. Happy Holidays!

Visit Our Website

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations Developer

(in reply to Panzer_Leader)
Post #: 38
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/9/2014 11:09:39 PM   
Panzer_Leader


Posts: 26
Joined: 1/10/2014
From: Auckland, New Zealand
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

Panzer Leader, they are packaged in the custom folder of 2.04. Plodder did them and gave us the ok to ship out with 2.04. You should see them in any game you play with 2.04 unless they are missing from the Map Markers\Custom folder.


Ah, thanks Capn Darwin, that explains it; I'm still running 2.03 while I complete a PBEM game. I should see them as soon as I finish that and load up 2.04.

Cheers

(in reply to Capn Darwin)
Post #: 39
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/9/2014 11:32:48 PM   
Capn Darwin


Posts: 4831
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline
Get ready for the impact of the updated engine. Heck 2.05 may be ready when you are too. We are working hard on that this weekend to address the few things we dinged up in 2.04.

_____________________________

2.08 Update is out. We are ramping up on 2.1 now. Happy Holidays!

Visit Our Website

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations Developer

(in reply to Panzer_Leader)
Post #: 40
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/19/2014 6:48:49 AM   
rjlee

 

Posts: 32
Joined: 9/28/2013
Status: offline
Nothing useful to add, but Iron Mike Golf: just wanted to say that I'm really enjoying your walkthrough of the Soviet offensive template. Have recently finished Baxter's "Soviet Airland Battle Tactics" and am now doing a cover-to-cover read of the old FM 100-2-* manuals for a doctrine refresh, and your scenarios and AARs are very helpful in placing these (otherwise rather theoretical) maneuver concepts in the context of the game engine. Still trying to figure out what the shake-out from the march into a line formation looks like in-game at this scale (maybe it manifests itself just as a slowing of movement?).

(in reply to Capn Darwin)
Post #: 41
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/19/2014 4:15:59 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
rjlee, I might do this again on a larger map (and 2.05) so we can see the whole MRB from the beginning of the scenario. In game terms, I am thinking it is the Main Body in column to line companies going to a 3 hex wide line formation. There would be a slowing down of forward movement to let the trail/rear security company close up and deploy in front.

While in column, I suppose the Main Body would move using Deliberate and the CRP and FSE would use Assault, since they would do that upon contact. Once the Main Body is deployed to battle formation, it would go into Assault. The CRP and FSE's task is to have a sufficient read on the enemy disposition to support an assault at that point.





_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to rjlee)
Post #: 42
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/29/2014 1:36:08 AM   
apd1004


Posts: 103
Joined: 8/1/2006
Status: offline
I'm enjoying reading your AAR's Jeff. I've been out of the scene for a while and this is refreshing to read. I played FCRS when it first came out but put it up after a while. Then I saw this, which now has me re-energized to play again.

I'd be interested to see how this scales up on a larger map to do a reinforced MRR vs a reinforced and task-organized US BN. Then you could game out how Soviet doctrine would work with multiple avenues of approach and how they would search for weaker areas of the defense for exploitation, and also the how to defeat the attack from the US side.

There are no absolutes and of course the situation dictates, but I think in most cases an infantry battalion might have a tank company attached or swapped for one of its infantry companies and if this is a main effort defense then the tank company might be available to counterattack or if the main effort has not been developed yet then the commander may simply attach tank platoons to reinforce his infantry companies.

Anyway, keep up the good work!

Jeff

_____________________________

apd1004
_______________
Jeff Leslie
Akron OH, USA

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 43
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/29/2014 2:22:02 AM   
Mad Russian


Posts: 12717
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline
The nice thing about this system is that it's extremely versatile. People are just now beginning to scratch the surface of what is possible.

So, as in Jeff's case you can leave for awhile and come back to find all new content and concepts.

I totally agree with him, Keep Up the Good Work!!

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to apd1004)
Post #: 44
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/29/2014 8:59:33 PM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
Jeff L,

I live in Akron, too. We just might have to set down with a beverage or two sometime and talk about it.

I have been planning on doing either an MRR or a TR attacking a Bn TF. Thinking mech heavy TF (3 x mech, 1 x tank) organized as 2 mech companies, 1 mech heavy company team and a tank heavy company team. 4.2" plt and a DS battery of M109s. Sct plt. Attached Stinger teams.

Time scale will be 48 hours. Recon battle with Reg Recon 24 hours or so prior to the attack.



_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to Mad Russian)
Post #: 45
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/29/2014 11:26:48 PM   
W1ll14m


Posts: 120
Joined: 3/27/2009
From: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iron Mike Golf
I have been planning on doing either an MRR or a TR attacking a Bn TF. Thinking mech heavy TF (3 x mech, 1 x tank) organized as 2 mech companies, 1 mech heavy company team and a tank heavy company team. 4.2" plt and a DS battery of M109s. Sct plt. Attached Stinger teams.

Time scale will be 48 hours. Recon battle with Reg Recon 24 hours or so prior to the attack.


If you need maneuver space for the recon battle at doctrinal distance ahead of the main force, I have this 40x36km NTC Central Corridor for you...
Regardless, I'm looking forward to another great AAR from you.

William

_____________________________

Replacements maps for Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 46
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/30/2014 4:33:07 AM   
Iron Mike Golf

 

Posts: 559
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline
William, I am interested in that!

Might even think about recreating my last rotation there in '87. Light Inf Bn/TF (3 x Rifle Co, 1 x Cav Troop). Main missions were infiltration attack and defending west end of The Valley of Death.


_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to W1ll14m)
Post #: 47
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/30/2014 5:28:51 PM   
apd1004


Posts: 103
Joined: 8/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iron Mike Golf

Jeff L,

I live in Akron, too. We just might have to set down with a beverage or two sometime and talk about it.



No kidding. What are the chances of that. Sounds like a plan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iron Mike Golf

I have been planning on doing either an MRR or a TR attacking a Bn TF. Thinking mech heavy TF (3 x mech, 1 x tank) organized as 2 mech companies, 1 mech heavy company team and a tank heavy company team. 4.2" plt and a DS battery of M109s. Sct plt. Attached Stinger teams.

Time scale will be 48 hours. Recon battle with Reg Recon 24 hours or so prior to the attack.



Yes, that I think would be the ultimate experience. MRB vs CO/TM is a committed fight, whereas the maneuver space to cover the full doctrinal battle at MRR level would force players to make some real decisions.

There was a book called First Clash that came out in the mid 80's. Ever see it? This is exactly what the book covers but with USSR vs Canadian forces in Germany. No T-80's vs M1A1's either, just Leo I's vs. T-72's. I'd like to see it with M60A3's vs. T-64's.

Cheers


_____________________________

apd1004
_______________
Jeff Leslie
Akron OH, USA

(in reply to Iron Mike Golf)
Post #: 48
RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 - 8/30/2014 8:21:20 PM   
Mad Russian


Posts: 12717
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline
First Clash is one of the books I read when doing the scenarios/campaigns. Good book.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to apd1004)
Post #: 49
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm >> The War Room >> RE: MRB Attack - Take 2.04 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.094